网曝门

Global Talent Fund ‘formula’ questioned as heavy hitters miss out

<网曝门 class="standfirst">Omission of UCL, Manchester and the Francis Crick Institute from international talent scheme ‘looks just plain odd’, claims researcher
July 24, 2025
Students arriving for freshers week at the University of Manchester consult their campus map, with a picture of 网曝门r Simpson in despair. To illustrate the shock that certain universities such as Manchester have missed out from the Global Talent Fund.
Source: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

Questions have been raised about why several leading research institutions missed out on government support to recruit scholars from abroad, with northern institutions describing their exclusion as “deeply disappointing”.

Last week the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) named 10 research universities and two research institutes that would?evenly share ?54 million from its Global Talent Fund over the next five years.

It said a “bespoke” selection formula had been used to select the institutions that will benefit, with the funding supporting the recruitment of 60 to 80 researchers in total. Many are expected to come from the US after the slashing of federal science funding by Donald Trump.

The omission of some UK’s world-leading universities has, however, caused a stir in the research community with scholars privately raising concerns over “politically connected” universities benefiting from the fund.

网曝门

ADVERTISEMENT

Although?the selection of the universities of Oxford and Cambridge, plus Imperial College London, was expected, there was confusion over the omission of other London-based institutions such as UCL and the Francis Crick Institute.

In a?, Annette Bramley, director of the N8 Research Partnership, also criticised the lack of?institutions from northern England among the fund’s recipients, with the universities of Leeds, Manchester and Sheffield among those to miss out.

网曝门

ADVERTISEMENT

“It is deeply disappointing that none of the selected institutions are based in the north of England,” said Bramley, pointing to her institutions’ track record in “driving innovation-led growth across the north and the UK as a whole”.

She called for “future programmes [to] take a more regionally balanced approach, aligned with the government’s commitments to levelling up and boosting productivity in all parts of the UK”.

According to DSIT, the formula used to select institutions considers data on their success in recruiting and retaining international research talent, success in winning European Research Council grants, and the number of staff recruited on UKRI-endorsed Global Talent Visas as a proportion of total academic staff.

Even with this rationale, the selection of some universities over London institutions that excel in recruiting overseas staff keen to live in the UK capital “just looks plain odd,” one senior researcher at a Russell Group university told?THE.

“We could probably understand if the list was made up of institutions that are excellent destinations for researchers but not the ‘obvious choices’ for overseas scientists as this would have a clear rationale in spreading funding around the UK,” he said.

网曝门

ADVERTISEMENT

But he questioned “a list with Oxford, Cambridge and Imperial, and at the same time Strathclyde, Warwick and Bath while ignoring Edinburgh, UCL and Manchester.?And nothing in England north of Birmingham”.

The selection of Queen’s University Belfast, Cardiff University and the University of Strathclyde – but not the universities of Glasgow or Edinburgh – has also been raised by researchers, given the lack of any geographical distribution mechanism.

The row follows criticisms from some MPs such as Chi Onwurah, former shadow science minister and now chair of the House of Commons’ Science and Technology Committee, that research funding??to the “golden triangle” of institutions based in London, Oxford and Cambridge.?

网曝门

ADVERTISEMENT

Some MPs have also quizzed science minister Patrick Vallance directly on this issue in light of his second government job as champion for the Oxford to Cambridge economic corridor.

Addressing the concerns, a DSIT spokesperson said: “Like all UKRI funding decisions, decisions on the awards from the Global Talent Fund were made independently, as per the Haldane principle. Institutions were selected based on measurable criteria relating to?the?research organisations’ track record.”

“They were not selected by ministers or government officials,” they added. “We want the UK to continue to be the natural home of the very best science and research, the world over,” continued the DSIT statement.

“The ?54 million Global Talent Fund will help some of our leading universities and research institutions to attract top researchers and their teams to the UK, to work in the high priority sectors that are critical to our modern Industrial Strategy,” it added.

网曝门

ADVERTISEMENT

jack.grove@timeshighereducation.com

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.
<网曝门 class="pane-title"> Related articles

As the Trump administration proposes enormous cuts for the US’ world-renowned science agencies, Jack Grove looks into what is driving the attacks beyond political malice – and what, if anything, can be done to plug the huge funding gaps

12 June
<网曝门 class="pane-title"> Reader's comments (1)
new
Someone has blundered I fancy? Mind you when they turn up from the US used to high salaries, health insurance packages, excellent facilities and see the chaos of the current system here and our funding crisis etc I fancy they might want to hop on the next flight back to Harvard or wherever they come from, Trump or no Trump!
<网曝门 class="pane-title"> Sponsored
<网曝门 class="pane-title"> Featured jobs
See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT